Islam has started a world war conflict

[Tecumsehsbones]

Based on keeping population numbers manageable relative to our Csis capacity to counter and keep the peace.

OK. Next question.

How long do you want to exclude all Muslims? I don't need a date, but I'd like some kind of ballpark standard if your answer is "until the threat is over," e.g., "five years after the last radical Muslim terrorist bombing" or "when a majority of imams worldwide explicitly declare violence a sin."

 

[Angstrom]

OK. Next question.

How long do you want to exclude all Muslims? I don't need a date, but I'd like some kind of ballpark standard if your answer is "until the threat is over," e.g., "five years after the last radical Muslim terrorist bombing" or "when a majority of imams worldwide explicitly declare violence a sin."

Indefinitely.

Now it be nice to learn what you think.

 

[Walter]

I've posted before that the war started in September of 1972.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Indefinitely.

Now it be nice to learn what you think.

Given the number of bombings that have been committed by citizens of the countries where they occurred, and given the fact that discriminating against a class of people tends to raise resentment, with the attendant likelihood of increasing radicalization, I don't think your measures are particularly well-designed to achieve their objective.

I've posted before that the war started in September of 1972.

Thank you for your contribution.

 

[Machjo]

Not long ago, ISIS made the declaration of World War 3.

This refuge crisis is intentional. Don't expect Muslim attacks to stop anytime soon.

It's just the beginning.

Police No go zones everywhere in Europe is proof, that they are invading.

They are not seeking refuge.

They seek conquest.

No go zones is occupation of land by ISIS.

So Angstrom. What do you propose to do about my belief in the Qur'án? Internment camp?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

So Angstrom. What do you propose to do about my belief in the Qur'án? Internment camp?

Heck, I'd give you one in the back of the head.

Nothing personal, Machjo. Just keepin' everybody safe.

Well, everybody except you, obviously.

 

[Angstrom]

So Angstrom. What do you propose to do about my belief in the Qur'án? Internment camp?

As long as you respect our laws of the land before the ones of the Quran, I will greet you with open arms brother citizen.

Given the number of bombings that have been committed by citizens of the countries where they occurred, and given the fact that discriminating against a class of people tends to raise resentment, with the attendant likelihood of increasing radicalization, I don't think your measures are particularly well-designed to achieve their objective.


Thank you for your contribution.

Are you suggesting we run more covert operations that undermine the credibility of the Quran?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

As long as you respect our laws of the land before the ones of the Quran, I will greet you with open arms brother citizen.



Are you suggesting we run more covert operations that undermine the credibility of the Quran?

Um. . . no. Not even sure how you got that from my post.

To be honest, don't think you got that from my post at all.

 

[Angstrom]

Um. . . no. Not even sure how you got that from my post.

To be honest, don't think you got that from my post at all.

Then are you suggesting we do nothing at all?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Then are you suggesting we do nothing at all?

No. To reiterate, I'm suggesting that your proposed solution does not seem well designed to address the problem, and comes with significant negative side effects.

 

[Walter]

I've posted before that the war started in September of 1972.

In Munich.

 

[Angstrom]

No. To reiterate, I'm suggesting that your proposed solution does not seem well designed to address the problem, and comes with significant negative side effects.

Less or more negative side effects then letting thing become out of control like in some parts of Europe?

Relatively to each other.

It's not easy picking between the lesser of two evils.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Less or more negative side effects then letting thing become out of control like in some parts of Europe?

Relatively to each other.

For the U.S.? More.

For Canada? Hey, do what y'all want. You already violate my notions of free speech, why not violate my notions of freedom of religion?

Your country. Do what you want. Don't affect me none.

This is a purely theoretical discussion, on my part anyhow.

 

[Machjo]

As long as you respect our laws of the land before the ones of the Quran, I will greet you with open arms brother citizen.

What about 'Christians' who disrespect the law of the land? Why the distinction.

I was raised Catholic by the way.

 

[Angstrom]

For the U.S.? More.

For Canada? Hey, do what y'all want. You already violate my notions of free speech, why not violate my notions of freedom of religion?

Your country. Do what you want. Don't affect me none.

This is a purely theoretical discussion, on my part anyhow.

Thanks for your honesty.

Freedom of religion is fine, until a religion says you are not free to practice any other religion or follow any other laws.

Freedom of religion only works when our worshippers are not fanatics.

 

[Machjo]

Maybe we could do what Israel does make make it compulsory for people to register their religious profession and inform the appropriate authorities whenever it changes?

Or like Irán where you must profess one of four 'acceptable' religions to attend university?

I like the UDHR myself.

Now if only Canadians could respect it.

Thanks for your honesty.

Freedom of religion is fine, until a religion says you are not free to practice any other religion or follow any other laws.

Freedom of religion only works when our worshippers are not fanatics.

You mean like the religion that gave rise to the Residential School system, the Indian Act, the Chinese Exclusion Act, the Gradual Civilisation Act, the separate school system, discriminatory immigration policies first based on nationality and later on language, etc. Etc. Etc.?

Of course I wouldn't call that religion Christian in the least.

 

[Angstrom]

What about 'Christians' who disrespect the law of the land? Why the distinction.

I was raised Catholic by the way.

There is a distinction between the two.

One acts in delinquence.
The other acts out of religious belief.

One can be rehabilitated.
Rehabilitating the other is against his religious freedom.

 

[Ludlow]

Your welcome .

It's you're. come on now. shyt.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Thanks for your honesty.

Believe me, it don't come natural. I had to stretch for you.

Freedom of religion is fine, until a religion says you are not free to practice any other religion or follow any other laws.

Freedom of religion only works when our worshippers are not fanatics.

Yeah, we have abortion clinic workers down here murdered by radical Christians. But somehow we managed to get on top of the problem without excluding all Christians.

 

[Machjo]

There is a distinction between the two.

One acts in a delinquence.
The other acts out of religious belief.

One can be rehabilitated.
Rehabilitating the other is against his religious freedom.

Do you have any clue what you're talking about?

I'd contemplated adopting Islám at my high school library after picking a Qur'án off the shelf and reading it.It was Rodwell's translation with his footnotes. FYI, the footnotes were critical of Islám, though the most elegant translation today in spite of the trandlator's anti-Muslim prejudices.

I was aware of fanaticism but was contemplating conversion based on what I was reading in the Qur'án (in context) in spite of what I knew about fanaticism in the Middle East.